scotland, not just the narrow view. why did the government suggest for the biggest decision in 10 years? during first day statement, mr. macaskill said eight times he was responsible for the decision, but at least eight times he passed the blame to others. and also a higher power. why did mr. macaskill visit mr. megrahi, and why make that visit when there was not one but two appeals in progress. what advice did he take from the crown office on that matter? we know now that mr. macaskill need not visit mr. megrahi in

prison. how many prisoners can have a justice visit them in their cell. and doesn't this conduct mean that no prisoner no matter the crime, will have a request turned down again? this has caused the split of scotland and next week colonel can breed this discussion. and the fine redeeming four-year term of government will be ruined by many for years to come. >> from this parliament and by the providing officer. and i say to you mr. scott,

it's my decision and mine alone. i stand by it and i will live with the consequences. no, i dontspeak to the proud, that would be inappropriate, and it would be wrong for me to approach them and therefore i didn't. and in terms of paper and process, we are looking to release as much as we can. and to make sure that those who have written and cooperated and those who have given evidence, have the courtesy to say if they want their names released. but we will seek to provide those papers. and can i say that i appreciate you as leader of the democrats, and can i say that i did look back at those who had given

compassionate terms before, and under the release of a child killer given a life sentence was released. clearly he committed one life, not 270, and he was provided the due process. and i believe of the people of scotland. and can i quote from another formal leader of liberal democrat, lord, said this morning, and it was not me as part of a deal or trade agreement. and i think that people should focus on that, and most people in scotland are in favor of releasing him on compassionate grounds. and you may take a different view, and as i said, this is my decision, i will stand by it and live with the consequences.

>> order. when it comes to open questions, i have 30 members wanting to ask questions, and i am keen that everyone who wants to ask a question do so. so i suggest that everyone be brief. >> the votes of scotland have criticized your legal system in application of justice in this case. and be aware that the report of releasing mr. megrahi on compassionate grounds go to many. and do you agree that if a cabinet be set down for compassionate release as mr. megrahi, and to deny that release is to criticize that decision. and can the justice confirm, that anyone who has made a request has been refused

compassionate release? >> no, i can confirm those who riteria, no cabinet secretary for justice has refused a release since 2000. and that's how the position is and the laws of scotland that i followed and those followed before me. >> when will the cabinet secretary publish on the advise to meet megrahi and it was not necessary to meet personally, and did not meet personally the american families. and given the decision, will there be a full leak inquiry into this? >> he's quite right, i did not meet with the american families, that was not possible. but we had a telecast link and

we were able to exchange and i listened for over an hour. and of the papers that were sent with as much information as possible, we have to be able that those who can, can provide their consent. and if not, we cannot publish that. and in subject of leak, and on sunday it was said that the decision was made and they knew about it four weeks ago. london said that i made a decision to refuse it. there was a wide range but i made my decision on wednesday, 19th august, 2009. i made it public on the 20th of august, 2009. and i stand before the chamber of the scottish parliament today to stand by my actions.

>> so to remain as the cabinet secretary, to maintain wisdom, integrity and justice and compassion. and these are the values of the parliament and government. and we expect much support from the families and our archbishop that you mentioned today. and there seems to be come confusion of what is meant by compassionate release. >> well, the guidance of my position as laid down of the guidance of the scottish prison, and this is followed by myself, and it wasn't simply the laws, but the guidance of scotland, but the values. and you spoke of archbishop, and i am glad there is talk on

this, but the church of scotland said this decision has sent a message to the world, of what it is to be scottish. we have decided to show mercy even those who hurt us didn't. and justice is not lost in acting in mercy. instead our deepest humanity is shown, and today our nation made that challenge. i made that choice, it was a tough decision. and i believe i followed due process and stood up for humanity that we pride ourselves as people. >> thank you, in the weeks following the horror of bombing of pan an 103, the people of

lockerbie received compassion of those americans who died in the sky. and the relationship of trust and friendship has remained over the years. how many families of the american victims did the justice consult as he made his decision to release mr. megrahi on compassionate grounds. and what stand did he take of their views, and what advice did he received on compassionate alternatives? did he explore those alternatives, and that the american families would know that he would remain and the trust would be honored. >> i think that the suggestion to send mr. megrahi to a

hospice in scotland is ludicrous, and people go there to have tenderness with their family, and not to be turned into a media circus, which is what would have happened. with the police, we discussed with the deputy constable, and as was said by many of different debates in this chamber, i do not direct the police on their operational matters. it's their advice, and that this security would be severe and a minimum of 40 officers. i decided on that advice, it would be inappropriate. and with americans that i interviewed, and those were contacted and we offered them every courtesy. have i done so and i am

conscious. and the pain for them started on december 21, 1988, and caused by the actions perpetrated by mr. megrahi. i feel their heart-felt pain and suffering, i can do nothing to take away that pain. but i had to make a decision not just on the basis to oppose the justice, but to stand up to the laws of scotland, which is to be able to show mercy. which i did. >> the cabinet secretary thought to aleve suspicions, and the contact of the libyan leader, and has met with

megrahi's son, and none of these events and the release are unrelated. did the first minister or the cabinet secretary feel at any stage that the cause of their negativity and that they were set up for a much bigger international gain? >> i did make it clear, and i thought it highly regrettable that the government of the united kingdom failed to exercise opportunity to meet representations that was made available to them, or to provide any information that would have counteracted information i received, both from the victims and american families, and from the government of the united states. that was i believe highly regrettable. i cannot comment or state what did or did not take place.

whether lord madinson and tony blair, i made my decision based on the basis and laws of scotland. it will be for others to decide if my actions were wrong and if the actions of others were appropriate. >> could i thank the cabinet secretary for his statement, and to comment of how much advice and support he received from the first minister of the release of mr. megrahi. any or none? and can i ask kenny macaskill confirm that his scottish compassion and bizarre reference of a higher power, whatever rule that may be. that every terminal prisoner,

no matter how hainuous their crime, and does kenny macaskill now offer to meet every convicted criminal seeking release on compassionate grounds if they command it? and does he feel that many in this chamber and all of scotland his concerns about his conduct and credibility as justice? >> sorry, cabinet secretary, there should be no applause from the gallery, that's against the rule. >> it will be for each one of us to decide what our compassion is. and i believe when you take the oath, and you may have some consideration, because it's

those comments that i scribe to and believe that are supported by the charts of scotland, you may disagree, and that's your right and entitlement. but i stand by my right of compassion and i believe it's supported by many. i am grateful to have the support of the first minister. but as i said, at the outset, this is my decision and my decision alone. i stand by that decision and i face the consequences. >> if we are to get through the members to ask the questions, they must have them briefer. i must ask for one question. >> thank you, the cabinet secretary has emphasized the process of consultation, of the agreement, and with regard of his meeting with mr. megrahi, and can the cabinet confirm

that of jack straw, and that the subject of a p.t.a. has the right -- >> one question. thank you, mr. patterson. >> like i said, this was a first ever prisoner transfer application that could be made by a national government without the consent of the prisoner involved. the application that came before me was an application by the government of libya. it was my requirement to hear representations from the prisoner involved. mr. megrahi chose to make those representations himself. i practiced in the courts of scotland for 20 years, have i never come across the instance where someone was to represent themselves, unless for a sexual matter, and they would be

refused that entitlement. natural justice dictated it. >> there are a number of people, and megrahi received a hero's welcome when he returned to libya. and with the libya government, can they consider the possibility of a pre-condition attached to mr. megrahi's release that would prevent his engagement? >> as i was said, assurances were given to me by the libya government. and they were not upheld, as to whether the decision would go, to the u.k. nationals or others. i regret very much that those assurances were not adhered to.

>> thank you, presiding officer, regardless of the current control and the strong views, it remains the case that mr. megrahi is a dying man. and likely soon to be a fact of history, that he would die in libya and not in a scottish prison. does the cabinet agree that a decision with longer term consequences is a decision that must be taken not only by the scottish government but the u.k. government, to publish all information relevant. not only for mr. megrahi's release and all those of scott's, libyan's and the world will be able to finally answer the serious and troubling outstanding questions in this case. >> can i simply say once again, presiding officer, that i stand by the investigation and conviction and indeed the fact

that that conviction was upheld on appeal. i recognize there are issues of concern to many. that's a matter to be proceeded by others. if it's sought by this chamber or anyone else, if an inquiry in scotland, we can consider it. but clearly the laws of scotland are concealed and the matters that are upheld are matters beyond that of scottish government and the parliament, they may be matters to be investigated but by the proper authority. >> further to the question and the cabinet secretary of publishing the relevant material, may i ask him to clarify of that of the review

commission, that there may be a misjustice, as an bomber, and if they can approve the report, and that's not within his power, will he support my call for full publication? >> i stand by the position i stated on the 20th of august, i have great pride of that of the police and scottish courts. they did scotland a great service to bring mr. megrahi to justice and trial. i recognize the individuals that have cause for concern. it will be for them to decide and other matters to decide if any public inquiries. what i can say, the scottish government will fully cooperate in any way to answer the questions. but it's for us to decide of

the jurisdiction of the lands and of the parliality. -- parliament. >> thank you, i am sure that mr. secretary will be well aware that his decision of mr. megrahi is wide-spread criticism and could deteriorate by the scottish government. it's agreed that such a visit would not be appropriate, and such a visit should be ruled out to avoid further damage to scottish reputation. >> i have to say i am not away of any visit, and we will do not to damage scotland's reputation. and you may disagree with my decision, and with your former colleague, and that the justice

minister has arrived at the right decision on compassionate grounds. >> will the cabinet secretary say what he said to mr. megrahi in his prison cell? what he said back to the cabinet secretary, and will he say whether or not he's made any effort to discover from mr. megrahi's council why he would agree that he would enhance his chances of going to libya? >> i made no such references to mr. megrahi, his counsel or those with him throughout the meeting. no such suggestion was made, it would be entirely inappropriate. i said at the outset of this matter, it would be following due process and proper guidance. and i made clear that his appeal was by him and the

courts, he made the decision without interference. >> thank you, people who are dying of prostate cancer can vary from days to years, and can the cabinet secretary detail the advice he received on his prognosis and of the cancer? >> dr. key is better qualified in the medical matter, but the report is provided to the united states government and made widely available. it's clear from the evidence contained in there , not from the director of health, but the consultants and other experts that dealt with mr. megrahi's treatment and after that ?the's terminally ill. that's a matter and whether he

would live longer or shorter. but the prognosis was terminal, and on that basis i made my decision. >> thank you, does the cabinet secretary recognize ever those of white -- those of us that take a different view, and whether he made the wrong judgment? can i ask the cabinet secretary if he asked his officials of the details of scotland, what did the cabinet secretary ask in terms of those compassionate terms? what the results and will he publish those? >> we spoke to the deputy council, he's the man incharge of operational guidance, and it's his guidance that we have to accept.

i will not interfere with the matters that are in the domain of the police. it may be that admiral and margaret believe that a hospice should be made available in scotland. i believe that the hospices that we have in scotland are entitled to be treated with dignity and not placed on them the encumbrance of numerous police officers and the entourage that would follow, and that people have their own dignity to die in comfort. >> the cabinet was told that you sought in the transfer agreement to set that understanding of the compassionate release order, and will the cabinet and all communications between the scottish government and u.k. government be made public, and if there was no such communication? >> as i said, we will be happy

to produce what we can, of the authorities to release them, whether victims or national governments. i cannot comment what they will do so say, it will be for them to justify their actions. >> to the people of lockerbie have made it clear they want to move on from that, and i understand this is a matter for the cabinet and bureau, but the cabinet secretary, will he and the party submit a democratic release of this chamber to show the world what the true scottish view on the matter, than this minority view? >> these are matters for the bureau, i do not seek to impose upon them, if that's what is wished of the bureau, then we

will fully cooperate with. >> presiding officer, i will never forget that particular day, because the very next morning, i left with my family on a pan am flight. so this is firm in my own mind, can the cabinet and the house elaborate more on the advice from the police and if any costs were given to them? >> costs are not a factor that we take account into the justice system, and had it viewed as appropriate, but this was based on the consequences of severe problems and the safety of mr. megrahi and other people. the consequences of those who live in close proximity, and that was a matter that had to be considered by me on the

suggestion of hospice care. i had to consider that decision, if i force mr. megrahi on a hospice in scotland to look after people in their dying days. i made a decision on operational advice. >> it's for the belief that the criminal justice system was not made. and not on the release that mr. megrahi on his appeal, and can he offer an explanation, why he said, i faced a choice that the hope of dying in prison and that my name be cleared. can you confirm, cabinet secretary, was it competent for this appeal to continue? or was it an obstacle to his release? >> according to the laws of

scotland, it would be competent for it to continue, whether he deceased. that's a fact of the laws of scotland. and yesterday it was revealed that no pressure was brought on mr. megrahi, and those of london made it clear that mr. megrahi was clear in his own name. and no pressure brought by the government of scotland, he did so to return home to die. .

in his statement last week and again today, he stated that he ruled out a prisoner transfer request. yet, at the time of his request for transfer, appeals were still pending. and as the cabinet secretary must be aware, transfers can only take place when all other processes have been completed. can if cabinet secretary advise the chamber how he could possibly rule out a prisoner

transfer when in fact no ruling was required of him? and can he advise us whether in fact his admissions from this matter have ever been advised to him to be incomp tent? >> no there's never been advice to me being incoverage tent. it was quite clear. i felt it entirely inappropriate. it was quite clear to me that the americans had either received or had an ookspectation that they received clear information prior to trial that he would serve his sentence in scotland and to say it was on that basis that i made my decision. >> the responsibility which now falls upon the council to be responsible for the where wits all and where abouts of him. can the cabinet secretary confirm what conversations he had and whether during those he explained to them the

arrangements he has put in place to recall him to custody should that prove to be necessary? >> as he is aware we do not operate the criminal justice social work directly from the house. it was for that reason it was the social work department who became responsible. officials have been discussed because clearly it's appropriate there should be these discussions at official level and clearly the requirements required to be laid down for the terms and conditions for the license that he required to sign. and the fact of the matter is that the guidance and the laws prescription prescribe that it has to be the council. there is no alternative. that is what is laid down by the due process that i followed. and, as i say, we sought thereafter to ensure that appropriate conditions would be in place regarding place of residency, limitations on travel. other matters that would appropriate not only in

scotland but also taking into account the peculiar and unique circumstances relating to this case. >> presiding officer, as someone who is here as part of the team the day after pan am 103 was brought down, i saw the full effects the atrocity and it is something i'll never forget. the cabinet secretary says he didn't make his final decision until after august 14. yet, the bbc reported exactly two days beforehand, something they would not have done unless they were sure of their facts. on the morning of their decision -- >> come to a question, please. >> the herald also reported his decision hours before he made it. the cabinet secretary has been asked three times whether he would make an inquiry. will he do so? because someone has been leaking information. and.

>> i will thank you mr. whitten of the time line. the application for compassionate release came in on the 24th of july. the medical report i received from the director of health and social care in the scottish prison service was dated the 10th of august. the financial submissions i received from my officials were late on the 14th of august. i made my decision on the 19 ds of augs and i made a full statement on the 20th of august. and as i said in response to previous questions there has been a variety of speculation on this. some speculated that i was going to refuse, many speculated i was going to make compassionate release. and some made speculation they knew about this four weeks ago. i nare rated the time line. i took due process and i followed that.

>> i'm really interested in the health grounds. i understand that the guidance is that death should take place or seem to probably take place within three months. the medical reports which i have read indicate that in july the lower end of the previous expectations were to be look at. and that meends that he in july was expected to survive for eight months until april 2010. and all medical advise ers have said the prognosis is really difficult to determine. so the three-month rule is questionable in this case. i would ask therefore who he took advice from other than a consultant urologist and a -- and the prison medical officer. did he take any ide vice from a care expert who would have a greater understanding of the possibilities around this? because if he lives for much longer than the three months this will add to the insult to american families and others.

>> presiding officer, i followed the three-month rule. that was the medical information given to me. the medical report that came from the director of health and social care from the scottish prison service was date it had 10th of august. that was based upon an interview and examination on the 3rd of august when it was made quite clear that there had been a change for the worse in his circumstances. i do not have the benefit of dr. simpson's training in medicine or psychiatry, but o i do follow the rules and guidance that are laid down for cabinet secretaries for justice. i do recall that dr. simpson has also served as the minister for justice. i followed the same rules and regulations that he would have been required to do so had it become before him. >> we are getting very short of time. >> thank you very much. and there have been countless reports in the media and indeed comments from members of this

parliament concerning the avingt of information on this case. can the cabinet secretary therefore once again consider an order to bring an end to these baseless accusations when they have been made and other reports from the governor and social work on which his decisions was based, when these reports were received. >> as briefly as possible. >> in the case that i received the full and final submissions on the 14th of august late on and i made decision on the 19th. >> does the cabinet secretary discuss any of the potential economic impacts arising from his decision and prior to its arrangement either with cabinet colleagues or anyone with the scottish government? >> absolutely not. >> as he may be aware it falls

on the local authority to monitor him under the terms of his release. it is also my understanding that the scottish government have only insisted that he attend a video conference once a month. a video conference once a month may i ask the scottish government what action it will take if he fails to show up for his monthly appearance? >> on the basis of the medical evidence given to me, i have returned him to lybia to die. >> the cabinet secretary will be aware that a u.k.tori suggest idea that basing it on additional grounds was throwing away a bargaining chip. will he join with me in condemning these comments as utterly inappropriate. and would he ask all other politicians in this chamber to reject such ideas? >> well, the laws i followed are the laws laid out by

previous administration. someone who thought under the border and some under liberal leave o within the scottish parliament. i followed due process. i hope and believe that everybody who is given the privilege to serve in this position before or after will follow that and will do so without conversation on political, economic, or dip plo matic routes. >> can i regret the plitization of what is a quasi judicial matter and for my part commend the justice secretary for a courageous decision, which is entirely consistent with both the principles of scott's law and christian morality as evidenced by the widespread support of churches across scotland? does he share my revullings, however, when he returned to lybia but does he accept that there is nothing that anyone could have done to stop that

and does he also agree that it is entirely irrelevant to the rights or wrongs of the original decision? >> cabinet secretary. >> presiding officer, i'm very grateful and i'm glad we share the same beliefs and values and they transcend whatever political evaluations we have. he acted without compassion and showed no sensitivity but to say our values are deeper and different. >> cabinet secretary i'm sure you will not suggest that you have a monopoly on beliefs and values as a christian myself. i do not share your position. however, i think we're both entitled to that position. you have indicated today that cost is not a factor in the scottish justice system. can i therefore ask you again specifically which alternative compassionate release options you considered, what advice you received on them, what the cost of them would be?

and if you're not prepared to give us those answers today if you will publish that as a matter of urgency. >> i can say as i said to others, i was not prepared to foist the incumbrens of him on any hospice in scotland requiring to deal with a terminally ill in their last moments. that would be unfair upon any of them. accordingly, i and i alone ruled that out. the other aspects relating to residence within house were based upon the advice that i had from the deputy chief constable. i am a great supporter of our police both with regard to what they did and what they do on a day and daily basis. >> and i thank all members for the forebearance and patience they have shown. this concludes today's business and i close this meeting of parliament.

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009]

>> the book is called republican leader, the biography of mitch mcconnell. good morning. >> what did you learn about mitch mcconnell in researching this book? >> i learned that senator

mcconnell has moved along the idea logical spectrum from a more moderate to a more conservative position. i've learned that he likes to use humor in his campaign ads even though he has a reputation as a very hard hitting campaigner, he often does it with a light, humerous touch. and i learned that from a very young age he has had his sight set ot becoming not only a senator but an important senator. and he's achieved that. >> from the book, ronald reagan provided a powerful example that conservatives do f could work both in practice and politically. he was also influenced by how come? >> well, mcconnell came of age under john sherman cooper, a senator from kentucky who was

moderate to even liberal. he had opposed goldwater in the republican primaries in 1964. he supported he support , at the same time reagan was being reelected, he saw that conservative ideas could work. the country have moved in a conservative direction. he is an avid reader. as he read columnist and watched phil gramm who he admires and practice -- in practice, and had an effect. host: he ran against another senator, and then a poll cannot join him ahead by nearly 45 - 50

percentage points. late in the campaign came these ads that have often a study by political scientist called hound dogs. >> my job was to find and get him back to work. he was missing big bets on social security, agriculture, and other things. he was making an extra $50,000 and giving speeches. i just missed him. let's go, we have him now. i was close. at this beach in pr. we cannot find him. we need to let him make speeches and switch to match for center. -- to mitch for senator. >> ever since the race has begun he has been missing, but now kentucky is closing in. we will ketchum.

-- we will catch him. no wonder his running from his record, but he can run forever. we got you now. switch to mitch mcconnell for u.s. senate. host: those were from 1984. kentucky was a democratic state. guest: yes, at that time it was very democratic. the brain behind the production of those went on to found fox news, but who had worked as a campaign consultant. senator mitch mcconnell had asked one of his aides to go with the incumbents voting record in his attendance record. they found that huddleston had made speeches for money on the same day he had missed votes in the senate. but it cited how they could use that -- they decided public use

that in the ad. apparently the ad-maker said he saw hound dogs. they started to air those in the late summer 1984 and turned the tide. huddleston had begun with a huge lead and mitch mcconnell began tightening the race and ultimately won by about 5000 votes. host: one of the lessons in any campaign is be prepared -- been prepared for an opponent. was huddleston badly prepared for mitch mcconnell? guest: yes, and i think you would acknowledge that. he had barely one jefferson county. -- barely won jefferson county. he was taken a little bit slightly. mitch mcconnell was from louisville, not always an asset. not to be from the big city in kentucky politics.

he is not your typical back- slapping, stump orator-type of politician. host: you point out in the book that early in his career he made a couple mistakes. you read that he made his share of mistakes in the first term. he blundered in 1985 by announcing that a large toyota plant was coming to kentucky when he had little to do with the project. it was not a terrific year. it had become painfully clear that he was not ready for the job and it would take considerable time for him to become an effective leader. guest: that is right. martha collins, a democratic who was at that time the governor of kentucky had much more to do with the toyota plans coming then senator mitch mcconnell did. he admits that he did over-reach trying to claim credit for that. he admits he was very much and repaired to become a senator.

he had devoted himself nearly exclusively to winning the office and got very little about what being a senator was all about. to his credit, he set about steading that with the same discipline and focus of the rest. of his rest since then he has become one of the most effective senators of this generation. host: we have been sharing conversations with authors of books out this summer. yesterday we introduced you to an author with a book out on barney frank. the phone lines are open. we have a caller from austin, texas. please turn down the volume on your set. caller: hi. i wanted to know a little bit more about your book. what made you write the book about him?

guest: well, senator mcconnell has achieved a level of prominence rare for a kentucky senator. he is only the second to lead in the senate. mitch mcconnell is also quite she and turning kentucky into a bonafide two-party state. it had long been a democratic- dominated state. also, most of kentucky's political history has been written from the liberal side of the deal logical perspective. i am a conservative. i thought it would be good to get political history out there from the right. also, always been a student of politics in government and i loved kentucky. this was a nice confluence of interests. host: a look back at some campaigns as written by john david dyche. the first is back to 1982 when

bush was defeated. guest: that is right. mitch mcconnell had to run for reelection in 1990 based on his clout and connections with the first president bush with whom he was very close, but by the time president bush was up for reelection the surge in popularity that of all the first iraq war had subsided. the country was turning its attention to domestic issues on which bill clinton was much more glib. mitch mcconnell had broken with bush on the read my lips, no new taxes' pledge. mitch mcconnell was against the

tax increase that bush had supported. president bush was defeated. host: in two dozen for you write this. -- in 2004. guest: in 2004, he had just been reelected in 2002, jim bunning, his senate colleague was up for reelection and was facing a tough re. the presidential race was going on at the same time with john kerry.

his colleague was facing a really tough race. he decided that the weight jim was using tactics the best approach would be to use federal issues into the kentucky senate race and to link bunning's opponent who is now running for the senate again in the race next year, to link him to john kerry. they did television ads late in the race linking him with kerry effectively. there was a gay marriage amendment on the state ballot at the time. the result was that bunning was able to hold on and win the election in 2004. mitch mcconnell has been the architect of several other races in kentucky, not only jim bunning's but also a house

and government race. he helped to change the democratic tide. republicans now compete seriously in nearly every race. host: our guest is john david dyche. we're joined from providence, rhode island by chris. caller: mitch mcconnell has some good positions such as keeping prayer in schools. but the eugenics' agenda and congress is to kill off the elderly -- this guy heading up, the up his a member of the hastings institute funded by the rockefeller foundation. it is made up of former members of the american eugenics society. they want to kill off the

elderly abortion is a population reduction program. host: there is a lot of misinformation in the caller points, but it is part of the overall health care debate. guest: i will respond in two respects. mitch mcconnell has been consistently pro-life throughout his political career. secondly, he is actively resisting the sort of drastic healthcare reform legislation the president obama and the democratic congress are pursuing. he favors [unintelligible] approach, would like to see it tort reform, individual health- care policy, the purchase cost being deductible the way group expenses are now deductible. he would like to see groups being able to band together to purchase health insurance. he would like to see the ability to buy health insurance across

state lines. he is pro-life, always has been. he favors a more incremental approach to health care reform. host: there is this a view which says i think the gop picks the most impulsive person to take the reins, such as the. they fly to get into office. guest: i'm not sure what lies she is referring to buy mitch mcconnell. he pretty much tells the truth about his positions even when they are unpopular. campaign finance reform, for example, is the issue with which is most closely identified. he has taken a ton of heat in both the kentucky media and the national media for his battles against so-called campaign finance reform legislation. he is pretty straightforward about it. it is the same way he is in raising money.

he aggressively raises lots of campaign money and he is pretty open about it. i did not find him to be propulsive personality at all. he is very polite in his debates in the senate, plays by the rules. fellow senators in both parties will tell you that his word is his bond because he knows it is the currency of successful legislative leadership. host: caller: good morning thank you. -- good morning. caller: first of all, let me tell you about the caller -- you should watch glenn? so you can answer these crazies. host: my job is not to respond

to the callers, but if the misinformation is there i want to make sure viewers know it. caller: welcome getting to your guest there. you know, i do not know if you watched the first segment of this program this morning when you had the doctor on from canada, but the doctor was very [unintelligible] and he is apparently an expert on canadian medicine and services. i guarantee that you can watch mitch mcconnell any morning when they open the senate, and i usually do, watch harry reid and them, and he tears right into the public option for health care. during that time -- if you don't believe it just go to canada. he goes on fox news and just sits there with some 40 doctors they got. the talk about how bad the canadian medicine is. now the question is, does mitch

mcconnell no his absolute stone cold line cannot or does he just like all the time? which is it? anybody would know his line about that if he is watched -- if he watched the for cigna. does he purposely lied all the time? guest: no, i do not think his line and in those statements, but i congratulate the caller on noting one of his most important tactics since he has been republican leader. he does it use his speeches, often his morning business-type speeches on the senate floor to consistently address an issue. the first to did in this session of congress was the closure of guantanamo. he hit that hard, consistently over a long period of time, and i think have some effect. he is doing the same now on health care reform.

i think his office would be happy to provide the caller with several instances of dissatisfaction in canada with the canadian health-care system. the public generally opposes, i think, a canadian-style health care system. it is not to say is in all respects a terrible system which is not the point i think that senator mcconnell is making. i think his point is a little more subtle than that. it is that we can have a much better system than canada if we embark on a series of incremental reforms to address the problems of access and cost and do not do a radical, unnecessary complete overhaul of what he believes is a very good system. host: lend me ask you about him as a tactician. let me read from the book this --

guest: that is right. that was a very important speech senator mitch mcconnell made. it went largely unnoticed, but is significant. sometimes center mcconnell and anchors or upsets -- senator mitch mcconnell upsets a movement-type conservative who believes in purging anyone who does not toe a very rigid doctrinal line. senator mitch mcconnell looking at reality does not believe the

republican party can succeed that way. he looks back ron reagan and sees a broader coalition. he has campaigned for liberal to moderate republicans in pennsylvania, rhode island, and sometimes takes some heat for it. he is there every day trying to get enough votes and win enough seats to accomplish a generally conservative agenda. this is the way he sees it best to maximize his options. host: some background on a trip guess, a graduate of harvard law school, also a graduate of center college, the location of one of the previous vice- presidential debate. guest: that is right dick cheney and joe lieberman who debated there. it is a liberal arts college of about 1200 students.

it had only a bell 750 when i went there. -- and only and only7 -- it only had about to 750 when i was there. justice scalia, and many others have been awarded honorary degrees. host: it is a pretty part of the country. caller: good morning. i was interested to hear your presentation and background on the history of ideas and how the senator moved from a liberal family to become a conservative. i'm calling on the republican line, but would have to say i'm honestly a former republican. a lot of us move toward the republicans during the 1970's because the democrats at that point ransom very mediocre, and convincing candidate.

there was the war on poverty, a mediocre time for democrat. i have moved since then. i am horrified by what many conservatives have done to this country in the last eight years. you ran back ad of mitch mcconnell against his opponent with the blood hounds chasing him, saying to please run on your record. i'm just wondering, are neo- conservatives honest enough to run on the record of the last years, putting this country in debt over were based on lies, the geneva convention, gitmo? if we keep it open it should be to send the neo-cons there. guest: that ad was not sing to run on the richter. it was criticizing huddleston for not being present when the senate was doing business and

instead being across the country collecting money for making speeches. just to clarify. host: in a word, going back to the 2004 campaign, how would you describe the relationship between bunning and mitch mcconnell? guest: it is not good now primarily because senator mitch mcconnell made a cold, rational political calculation that senator bunning would not be the best republican candidate to keep the seat in 2010. center mitch mcconnell likes and respects him very much. he would be happy to have another republican who voted just likebunning in the sea, however bunning made a number of mistakes in the 2004 campaign. he had not raised the money

liking needed to have done a. while mitch mcconnell respect him, his top objective was to win. he put that loyalty ahead of personal lotis. -- he put that loyalty ahead of personal loyalties. that upset some people that he does not put personal loyalties above others. host: john david dyche will be with us until the top of the hour. reading, pa. is next. caller: good morning, how are you today? yesterday, i watched c-span for about 14 hours. wash the funeral of a giant of american politics -- i watched

it a wonder, what mitch mcconnell has proposed? does he have any law? guest: senator mitch mcconnell and senator ted kennedy were surprisingly close. senator mitch mcconnell admired him as a senator very much. he had invited kennedy to louisville to speak. mitch mcconnell's mentor had been a close personal friend with john f. kennedy, had served on the warren commission. in fact, when kennedy became president, one of the first dinners he had was with senator cooper. there was quite a close personal connection there. politically they could not be much more different. in terms of their personal characteristics they could not

be much more different. senator mitch mcconnell is extremely sober. he is not the most gregarious of people. his very circumspect in his dealings. they worked well together, though, because mitch mcconnell is the epitome thea senator. he recognized senator kennedy's effectiveness. host: good morning, florida. caller: i would like to have your guest addressed the nixon strategy with regard to the republican presence in the south now, which with the exception of nelson and landrieu is nearly completely republican, just as new england is nearly completely democrat.

the bottom line is that the tale of kentucky being democratic we have to understand that for many years this out was pixie- =cratic, more conservative than some republicans in the northeast. those in illinois were more moderate, even liberal compared to the dixie-crats in this out. also would dress, with regard to mitch mcconnell a helms, and the others -- -- if he would address it -- they want to have healthcare, but i have patients who are without medicine, without a roof over their heads. they are seen problem. for the most part they have waited for 70 years for a health care reform bill. these multi-millionaire

senators who are in debt to the insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies want us to take time. they do not want someone to come between a patient and their doctor. host: i'll stop you there. there is a lot of information there. guest: the question about the southern strategy is a good one. kentucky is pretty much a southern state, more accurately a border state. it was not a dixie-crat type of state. those were elected senators right as mitch mcconnell had moved to kentucky after having grown up in alabama and georgia. mitch mcconnell grew very pro- civil rights. his first internship with us with a very conservative rep, snyder.

mitch mcconnell saba and w the h of martin luther king. he was instrumental in breaking a filibuster that democrats had mounted to hold up the civil- rights act of 1964. he supported a similar piece of legislation as a student at the university of louisville. kentucky had its own civil rights statute that he was 4. he was personally present when president johnson signed the voting rights act of 1965. he was instrumental in working with democrats concerning the statue of rosa parks at the u.s. capitol. mitch mcconnell does not come from the southern strategy type of environment that has helped the republican party take over

there. that is not his pedigree at all. again, on the health care situation, senator mitch mcconnell very much once productive changes in healthcare that would increase access and lower-cost. he thinks that a massive bureaucratic change will do neither. host: this message from twitter -- why was there no gop proposal to reform health care in the past eight years? guest: that is a legitimate criticism. the presidenrepublicans did nots much as they should have. but the filibuster works both ways. he looked at the situation where president bush tried to reform social security after he was reelected in 2004. the entitlement is in serious trouble. he barnstormed the country in

the republicans in the senate could not get a single democrat to work with them. the democrats made a calculation that they would block and blame. that is some defense of the republicans for not getting health care reform ben. overall, though, i think that is a fair criticism. host: "republican leader: a political biography of senator mitch mcconnell" -- mitch mcconnell won in 2008 a record fifth term in kentucky. >> for too long, mitch mcconnell has been running away from his record, but now kentucky is closing in, bailing out wall street, tax breaks for big oil, it get him. we will ketchum. shipping jobs to china. voting with bush. no wonder mitch mcconnell is running from his record, but he

cannot run forever. it is enough years in washington. it is time for change. >> but would they find it they will looking for bruce? will you be at his home in florida? the 11 homes in six states. with a sniff out his record? virginia investigations showed huge fines by the veterans administration. after falling his trip, kentucky needs to stick with mitch. host: his margin of victory last year? guest: about 6% of bruce lunsford. lunsford was largely self-funded as he is a millionaire. the race tightened for a while as the economy when south, but

lunsford like some and the others tried to run against mitch mcconnell in ways that did not make sense. no one has ever successfully made issues like campaign finance reform the turning point in one of these senate races. supporting president bush, even though bush's popularity had declined, supporting president bush was not that much of a liability. senator mitch mcconnell had been extremely effective in bringing home federal project pork ky. citizens of kentucky thought he was doing a lot of good for the state. they wondered why to turn him not it now that he had achieved of an official status. it looked tight, but senator mitch mcconnell one more

comfortably than the naysayers thought. host: the author is a lawyer. he is the author of this new book on mitch mcconnell. wendy is next from tax. caller: good morning. i had a couple of questions. -- she is from texas. caller: i am a republican, but i am american first. you said that republicans tried to change healthcare, but republicans did not, but you did not stepped in and just do. did you spend a lot of time with the senator to write this book? guest: i did not say that democrats did not want lower costs. i said that senator mitch mcconnell believed the message by which democrats purport to be

seeking lower-cost would not be effective. i do not think senator mitch mcconnell would challenge the good faith of democrats on that issue. yes, i spent a good bit of time with the senator. i interviewed him several times, it came to washington a couple of times to observe him. i went to a university of louisville football game with them. that is one of his passions, especially when they are winning. he was very generous with his time. host: the napier freeze this from the book -- if someone hurdles pebble -- hurl a boulder back. that is one of senator mitch mcconnell maxims. so, if one of his opponents goes

up early with a campaign ad, mitch mcconnell goes back with the massive early media buy to make sure his opponent was not on the airwaves alone are not in a way that would really move the new. he definitely believes in an aggressive -- in aggressive campaign tactics. caller: hello. i was glad to hear that senator mitch mcconnell is per-live. -- pro-life. unfortunately, even though senator kennedy called himself a catholic, he was pro-abortion. he was really for eugenics and de population. i'm sure that you are aware that the amendment does not take care of the abortion issue in the

health care reform bills. abortion must be explicitly covered, or the money will be used to fund abortion. my question is, i am wondering whether you know if the senator has any plans to oppose the imminent to explicitly exclude abortion stacks -- any plans to oppose the amendment to explicitly exclude abortion? i think it is important to be pro-life and to make a stand. host: this e-mail arrived from of your at the same time. guest: it is really two separate questions whether the government should be funding abortion is one question, and while i have not asked senator mitch

mcconnell specifically his position on the issue the caller raised, i would anticipate he would be where senators enzi and hatch are on that issue. it is hard to find instances where he has varied from a thepro-life -- from the pro-like position. icoming in between a woman and her doctor come no, in most instances, but i believe he would look at each particular situation and not just go on cliche . that -- as far as coming in between a woman and her doctor, no. even though he has been consistent plely pro-life it has

not figured prominently in his campaigns or careers. that is primarily because kentucky, although largely democratic, it is socially conservative. that position prevails in kentucky for the most part out of the urinary. host: welcome to the program from the independent line in dallas. caller: thank you for c-span. see if the guest can confirm my memory. during the ross perot contract with america is days it was mitch mcconnell who got up and very much opposed the balanced budget amendment. i have learned by listening this morning that apparently senator

mitch mcconnell is against campaign finance reform. would you confirm my memory and whether this is true, if mitch mcconnell is a candidate for term limits? guest: i cannot confirm your recollection as to the balanced budget amendment. in fact, i think you are incorrect. senator mitch mcconnell does oppose what is popularly called campaign finance reform. he was the lead plaintiff in the case with the supreme court challenging the john mccain- feingold law. it was largely a unsuccessful, but he's keeping it up with some surprising allies.

i will say this about the contract with america, however. senator mitch mcconnell was not a real gung-ho supporter of all aspects of the contract with america. in particular anything having to do with term limits he opposes. he strongly opposes that. he thought the contract may have over-promised. he thought was a nice way to get attention, but an anti-clinton vote in 1994 that led to the republican takeover of congress. host: the next call in isjoe from lexington, ky -- the next call is joe. caller: did morning. john david, i was wondering if you would consider senator as

more of a political animal, a beltway insider, or as someone who is merely representing the republican party on a national level? guest: a little bit of all. he is very much a political animal, does not have a whole heck of a lot of outside interests other than politics. to some degree he is a beltway insider. he has been the president of the alfalfa club, rather elite washington group that meets once per year. he was married to a cabinet officer in the bush administration, secretary of labor elaine chao. you don't do that without being a washington insider to some degree. he is the quintessential republican. he thinks what is good for the republican party is generally what is good for the u.s.

he is much more republican than a conservative, even though he is conservative and gets high numbers from the conservative rating group. he is more about the two-party system, believes it is a good thing for the u.s. it is one reason he opposes some of the campaign finance reform measures. he thinks it hurts the two-party system. host: the next call is from california. caller: no one has mentioned that ron paul's son is running for the senate in kentucky. i have been a republican all my life, but i am a real republican. senator mitch mcconnell has been sold, bought and paid for by apac. he is a corporate hack the

supported theneo-con war for israel. guest: if everyone had bought and paid for senator mitch mcconnell the people say, he would not be able to get up out of bed in the morning. he is anything but bought and paid for by any group as best as i can tell. he is strongly supported by apac. he has been a strong and steadfast supporter of israel throughout his political career, but he had that position when he first began. it was not something anyone has purchased. yes, paul is running for the senate in kentucky. he is a very smart guy. he can raise a lot of money. i think senator mitch mcconnell just believe thatgrace who is also running prisons the best chance for republicans holding

at sea. he has not endorsed -- for holding that seat. he never has endorsed, but he lets his preference been known in of the was. while i'm sure his very impressed, i think he is making a cold political calculation. come the general collection, trey grason by the way, this segment is the first part in a three-day series that will air live from

the hospital room in arlington, virginia. also, paul rainwater to discuss recovery efforts in louisiana four years since hurricane katrina. washington journal live at 7:00 a.m. eastern here at c-span. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009]